A Little Less Talk.......

....and a lot more action. I have been suffering from a writer's block, especially in this subject area where so much has been written. As time has gone by, I have noticed that I am often repeating myself. Of course, that happens with a lot of causes. And some things do bear repeating.

The latest political unrest and national and international crisis have distracted me. As a senior citizen, largely reliant on Social Security and Medicare, I am afraid of what I see happening in the halls of congress and in the White House. As a die-hard liberal, I am frustrated.

But, first and foremost, is my interest in seeing justice done for the Mothers of the EMS and our adult children. We can't change the past, but we can address the injustices and damage done and demand that something be done in the way of redress and civil/human rights.

It's a simple request from our adult children. Give them access to their Original Birth Certificates in a simple and straightforward bill with no embroidery and contact vetoes and "on-demand" medical histories from their Mothers. It shouldn't take 80+ pages to give our children the right to information they should have had all along. Then let the ADULTS involved take it from there.

It's not quite so simple in the case of the Mothers' issues. But, if they can complicate something as simple as OBC access for adoptees, think of what they could do with our plight. I do know that we are sick and tired of the Industry, adopters and others who don't know us presuming to speak for us. We are big girls now. If we want to say "no" we can do it on our own without the help of the ACLU, NCFA or the EBDI. That is, of course, if we want to. The vast majority of us DO NOT want our names kept from our adult children. The states and bill writers are big-brothering us to death with this one.

Well, come August 8, I will have my opportunity to put my physical presence where my mouth has been, lo, these many years. I am braving the heat of the big city of San Antonio, Texas to add my voice to those seeking the cooperation of state reps. The National Convention of State Legislators will be meeting there and adoptees and mothers will be there. We shall see what we shall see because a couple of us will also be representing SMAAC and the Mothers' issues. We have been working on a brochure for our cause and hope to see it in the hands of someone who might actually learn something from it

.

We will be there with adoptees, demonstrating and, hopefully, educating. This is not an easy task. We are bucking a status quo with which our entire society has been not only comfortable, but enamoured. Adoption mythology in the US is right up there with the flag, baseball, apple pie and fireworks on the Fourth. It is another of those feel-good myths that people would rather believe than see the dark underbelly. It is presented to the public by the Industry, and those that profit in any way from it, in the same skewed way that we have taught American History to our children..totally slanted and prettied up with the dirt swept under the rug. Getting the word out about the realities involved is going to be an uphill climb.

So, San Antonio, don't get me wrong. I know you have that lovely RiverWalk and that little, historical, adobe mission, but you could never get me to come there in August for those attractions. Triple-digit heat is not my thing. But the cluster-f*** of sealed records, the inequities of coerced surrenders and the grief of Mothers and the civil and human rights of us and our adult children can and will get me out there in the heat. And I'm mean when I'm hot.

Watch out, you State Legislators...the adoptees are coming and they are bringing their Mamas!

Unmitigated Gall and Execrable Rationalizations

Musing Mother also posted this bit on Machiavellian Tactics and propaganda and twisted stats to encourage social engineering. I copied it here so that everyone who doesn't think that the industry is out to brainwash and coerce single mothers and who ignore facts while justifying injustice can see the proof, no matter what blog they read. This is what they really think they should do. They wrote it, I didn't.

 So, it does seem that Mr."Chucky" Johnson, in lock-step with and using the words of Mr. Tom Atwood, and his adoption posse, the NCFA, DO believe that single women and less affluent people don't have the right to parent and that all should be done to "educate" (subtly coerce) mothers into surrender of their newborns. Therefore, he presented the manifesto written by Tom Atwood, NCFA's former president, almost as if his own. Oh...and they lobbed the "bitter bomb" as well. It's easy to dismiss our righteous indignation that way, ya know?

And, when citing the increasing number of foster children in the system (at the time...the number has actually decreased as of this year), he had ignored the avid child-snatching of state DSS agents who ignore the edict that family reunification should be a primary concern. No, Chucky/Tom insinuates that the number of children who were in the foster system was directly related to single mothers choosing to keep and parent their own babies. There is also the fact that Mr. and Mrs. Entitled Adopter don't want these older kids with a history and problems. They want that womb-fresh baby, preferably born to the homecoming queen/class valedictorian.

I have some questions for Mr. Chuck Johnson (who is a medium and channels Tom Atwood, still living, I believe,) and the Industry he supports.

HOW DARE YOU MAKE THIS JUDGEMENT? HOW DARE YOU INTIMATE THAT MOTHERS ARE UNFIT JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE SINGLE? HOW DARE YOU IGNORE THE VOICES OF ADULT ADOPTED PEOPLE AND MOTHERS WHOSE CHILDREN WERE APPROPRIATED FOR ADOPTION FOR THE SAKE OF THE BOTTOM LINE AND ELITIST SOCIAL ENGINEERING? WHO GAVE YOU THE INSIGHT INTO WHAT WE ARE FEELING SO MUCH THAT YOU CAN LABEL IT?

Oh, and that's not bitterness, Tommy/Chuck. That's boiling, blistering anger. That's the righteous indignation of huge numbers of mothers and their adult children who have been adversely affected by this crap you spew so vigorously. You pompous pundits have denied, in one page of tripe, the truth of the experience of so many. Who died and made you the arbiter of who should and should not be allowed to parent their own children?

Dear Reader, You might have to increase your screen zoom level in order to read this piece of elitist garbage. This also comes with a warning. Keep a barf bag or bucket handy.



CHUCKY AND YOUR PREDECESSOR,  YOU DON'T KNOW JACK SH**!!

So Many Demons, So Few Awards

Pound Pup Legacy is sending out the request for nominees for its next "Demons in Adoption" award. There is a blurb about it in the left-hand column of this blog page. The former winners are notable and deserving. The NCFA, every one's favorite, could almost be re-nominated every year. The adoption propaganda machine in Hollywood can be justifiably proud of the damage done by the movie "Juno" and Bethany Christian Services truly earned their win.

The big question is who to nominate? There are as many demons as there are flavors at your local ice creamery. I am having a difficult time sifting through all the most notable examples of adoption demons in order to choose the most worthy. The list is endless and many of those nominated would not really be good choices because they come from individual situations and could earn the nominator a libel suit.

But, here are my top ten choices:
1-Adopters everywhere deserve this "honor" because it is their desires and demands that keep the wheels of the Industry turning.
2-The National Organization for Women, NOW, for refusing to see the appropriation of a woman's child for adoption as a "women's issue."
3-The Evan B. Donaldson Institute, a wolf in sheep's clothing that presumes, along with the NCFA and others of that ilk, to speak for mothers who are capable of speaking for themselves.
4-On that note, Adam Pertman would be a good choice for something he said that was overheard in a discussion about helping mothers keep their babies. Per Mr. P., "If we helped them then we wouldn't be parents."
5-The government of the United States of America for their Adoption and Infant Adoption Awareness Programs and Initiatives. We can stick it to both sides of the aisle with this one.
6-"Birthmom Buds," a saccharine group of good beemommie shills for infant adoption.
7-"Birthmother Ministries," another example of the same treacle.
8-Any and all Crisis Pregnancy Centers that offer help only to steer mothers towards surrender.
9-Patricia Irwin Johnston for giving us "Respectful Adoption Language."
10-The "Safe Haven Laws" that encourage parents to leave their babies off at designated sites in an effort to reduce the instances of babies placed in dumpsters (overstated..numbers are not that high) rather than offering protection and help for both mother and baby and producing another generation of closed, secret adoptions.

I could keep on and on with an endless list of those who have caused undue pain and suffering to adopted people and mothers of appropriated children. I could add numerous celebrities, such as Nicole Kidman, Tom Cruise, Sandra Bullock, Callista Flockhart, Michelle Pheiffer, Jamie Lee Curtis, Sharon Stone, Madonna, Rosie O'Donnell, Hugh Jackman, Angelina (the mouth) Jolie with honorable mention to Matthew Broderick and Sarah Jessica Parker, for using surrogates. And that is just a small portion of the famous and infamous that have accessorised with adopted children.

I am sure, Dear Readers, that you can come up with a list of your own. So give it some thought, go to the Pound Pup Legacy link (above) and give someone a chance to reap a bit of payback for what they have sewn.

And remember, Demons are as Demons do.

Snacks For The Dragon

I think one of the most vivid symbols I get in my mind whenever I think of mothers and adoptees harvested and appropriated for adoption is that of a dragon devouring us. The dragon (the adoption industry) grew fat and strong during the EMS and now, is having to subsist on snacks which it hunts in disguise and beguiles into its trap. In the old legends, the fear-filled townspeople would choose a young girl, a virgin, and bind her to a post outside the dragon's den. Thus they ensured that the dragon would leave them alone.....until it got hungry again. Now that the young girls are less respectful of the town elders, the dragon has had to find another avenue to procure its favorite food.

The problem is that the dragon stays hungry. It wears many faces but they are all the faces of greed, envy, covetousness and self-entitlement. The dragon is the PAP lusting after the womb-fresh infant of another woman. The dragon is the adopters poisoning the adoptee's mind against the woman who gave him/her life. The dragon is the NCFA, lobbying in the halls of our government. The dragon is the elected official lusting after the votes and whatever other goodies the lobbyist offers. The dragon is the fundamentalist, reactionary, right-wing church, seeking to expand their numbers and prevent a woman from making a choice. (I believe it has a large lair in Utah)The dragon is every facilitator of adoption who profits from the tragedy of the separation of mother and child. The dragon is the media, ignorance of the truth about the tragedy, and the collusion of state, church and the Industry.

The dragon has so managed to cloud its true nature, that the victims go to it, thinking they are going to be saved, when what they get is devoured. Then, once these gullible snacks have passed through the dragon's gastric system, they laud and glorify the dragon as benevolent, warm, fuzzy and, Golly, just so RIGHT.

The dragon crosses oceans and skies to find its meals. The hunger in its belly, created by its own mythology, never goes away, is never satisfied and is always looking for ways to increase its food stock. It sings its siren song from pulpits, television and movie screens, social service departments and the ignorance of the townspeople. It is politically correct, brings a sweet tear to the eye and is a daggone, Martha Stewart-type, all-around GOOD THING. No one but the ones who have been eaten by the dragon really see the fiery breath and the dagger-sharp teeth.

We speak up, we shout, we write, we demonstrate and we sign petitions and so far, the progress is minimal. I have stopped wondering why it is so hard for the general public to listen to us. I know we are going to have to turn the dragon's fire against itself by chipping away at the myth and the stereotypes. We can try to keep new mothers from entering the dragon's cave. But we can't save them all.

The dragon consumed me and I passed through. But I am not going to be dragon shit. If anything, many of us, mothers and adoptees, are proving to be similar to another mythical creature...the Phoenix. We are breaking free of that draconian dung-heap to which we were consigned and refusing to let the blazing belches of the dragon silence us. For us, there is nowhere the dragon can hide and no way it can disguise its true nature from us. We know the Beast.

Hey, if it has scales, big teeth and breathes fire, it's a dragon.

Stigmas and Shaming and Secrets, Oh My!

It was really good to read at The Declassified Adoptee blog and see that she has become very savvy about what has been done to us as mothers. This is down a couple of paragraphs in her most excellent post, but it is so very, very true. The fact is that we were stereotyped, stigmatized and dismissed as disturbed and delinquent. She dug and read and learned and put it so well, here.


"...When First We Practice to Deceive



Birth records became more difficult for Adult Adoptees to obtain as the later-half of the 20th century progressed. This was due to the social stigmas that unwed, "adolescent" mothers were fundamentally flawed and would interfere with the adoptee's developmental stages and the Adoptive Parent's ability to bond with the adoptee if they knew the adoptee's identity and/or whereabouts. What started as a way of hiding illegitimacy turned into a way to label Original Mothers as a threat to their children."
 

You know, from that evaluation, I can't help but picture us natural moms as a bunch of dingbat witches intent on cursing our own, much loved babies with something awful. I don't know what they thought we could do to them other than want them back. I don't know if our flaw was moral or psychological as these "experts" saw it, or both by all, but that mind-set worked well enough that the attitude stayed with quite a few of us for a long time. Not being considered a "whole" and "unflawed" person played Hell with my self-image for years.

I can remember the first time I ever heard any mothers protest the labeling that was put on us during the EMS. I had, timidly, gone to a "search and support" meeting. While there, looking for some support when all the emphasis seemed to be on search, I did hear something worthwhile. Some adopter was there making comments about how we shouldn't feel bad that we weren't in a position to keep our babies. Another mother spoke up and said, loud enough to be heard by all, "We were unwed, NOT unfit." Hallelujah and Amen, Sister!

We are still being blamed for the fact that records closed, for the fact that some people want to keep them closed and probably, global warming. The industry hides its misdeeds behind our stereotyped images. We used to joke about natural mothers wearing bangs because it helped cover the scarlet letter branded on our foreheads. Now, we just refuse to wear the letter. We didn't deserve it then and we don't now.

We can now look into our research and see the number of successful, well-adjusted people who were raised by single mothers. It wasn't the fact that we had no husband. It was because we had never had a husband when we became unmarried moms. Many women, divorced and widowed, raised children on their own. But, we didn't have that man's name as our own, nor never been gifted with that gold band. This had the social workers, psychologists and clergy judging us as a group without knowing a single one of us as an individual with values and a heart that could be broken. They only saw single girls who had engaged in "carnal intercourse" as evidenced by our growing bellies.

The social workers never, that I can remember, took the time to get to know me when I was in that situation. I imagine they saw the fear and the dread and the loneliness but that was due to my "flaws," as well. Our minister suggested to my mother that I should have a hysterectomy when I became pregnant after being date-raped. All he could see was the fact that I had gone and gotten myself pregnant, again. Neat trick, huh? I, and earthworms and some phyto-plankton can do that. It's bio-magic with a twist.

I am sick and tired of the Industry, their lobbying cartel, attorneys and legislators using us as an excuse to keep from looking at the families being ripped apart, and people becoming unable to know who they are or where they originated. We went from being breeding stock to being portrayed as frail, frightened, fragile older women afraid of their scarlet past catching up to them. Ye Gods! it makes me want to jack-smack as many of them as I can find. And most of us are about as "fragile" as Mack Trucks.

I imagine that the NCFA and their ilk are having quite a problem understanding the phenomenon of mothers not only challenging them but using our own names when we do it. What happened to all that shame the "counselors" so carefully worked to instill in us?

Sorry Chuck, and all the rest. We grew up and wised up. Go peddle your lies to adopters. We aren't buying them and neither are our adult children.

Watch Out For That Windsh...........!!

One of my favorite new truisms is one that came to mind a few days ago. To quote myself, " the windshield was never the bug's original destination." Another fact that bears noting is that the bug doesn't hit the windshield. The windshield hits the bug.

Down here in FL we have a bi-yearly plague of little black monsters, so noxious that even the birds and dragonflies won't eat them. They leave purple stains on your pants if you happen to sit on one. Their corpses are corrosive and will eat through the paint on the front of your car, where they often are killed en masse, just by being in the wrong place at the wrong time. They bear a slight resemblance to fireflies but without the pretty phosphorescent tail. Their only objective is to mate and die, and many die before the job is done. They are called "Love Bugs."

Drive across a bridge over a lake or slow-moving river, like the St. John's, and you will encounter clouds of midges, non-biting mosquitoes, that sound like sleet hitting your windshield. They, too, have emerged from the waters to reproduce. They are, like the (eeeeewwww) Love Bugs, just doing what they were born to do.

So there these little aviators are, just doing their thing, looking for a mate or enjoying the purpose of their existence, when along comes this big, fast, shiny thing and Bam! Bye bye, Buggsy. The driver usually mutters a curse or two, turns on the windshield washer, and keeps rushing to whatever destination they are so  bent on reaching.

Now isn't that a slice of life straight from the land of the exiled mother? We were just minding our own business, giving and hoping to receive the love of our fellas and bang! Out of the blue comes this behemoth of an industry, and we are smashed flat, dispossessed of our infants and left to wave feeble limbs in the breeze.

A couple of days ago, a number of us, at the invitation of the National Council For Adoption (the NCFA) who says they love to hear from (natural) mothers, posted our stories and our opinions at their Facebook page. Bug, meet Windshield. It only took them about 36 hours to remove some of the discussion comments, ban some of us from posting and make their page safe again for the entitled and the brainwashed. Wonder what they were afraid of? They invited us and we mothers and some adoptees, tired of the arrogance of this organization in presuming to speak for us, took them up on it.

Just yesterday, a very clever and witty woman decided it was time for the Bug to become the Windshield. There is now a Facebook page entitled "The National Council For Adoption Sucks." There is a lot of satire, sarcasm and timely truth to be read at that site. If the truth is not allowed at warm, fuzzy NCFA-Land, then we will tell it where we can. We have our blogs, our groups and now we have NCFAS. One way or another, we are going to be heard.

There was a time when I believed that this nation suffered from selective hearing. But the truth is that it also suffers from selective information. There is that which is allowed and that which isn't. Only the "good" beemommies with the party line etched into their brains are allowed to speak at the NCFA site.

There was this pearl of wisdom that really sent me into a choking fit, straight from the NCFA. They claim that "most (natural) mothers and adoptees are highly satisfied by their adoption experience." Yeah, right. And the Stepford wives loved being replaced by androids. There is so much truth denied in that one specious statement that I can't even begin to list the inaccuracies. It is an insult to every mother who ever mourned her lost child and every adopted person who felt a part of them was missing.

I think it is time that the industry, the NCFA, the Evan B. Donaldson Institute and the government of the US of A realized that the bug is morphing into one mother of a windshield. The more they try to discredit us, the more they try to speak for us rather than listening to what we have to say, the more we are going to press the issue.

I think the season of the windshield is upon us.

Open Records, Again; Who's Protecting Who?

It has been reported that the Michigan chapter of the National Orginazation of Women (NOW) opposes the legislation, HB 4015, being considered in that state espousing open access to the original birth certificate for adult adopted people along with the usual demands for contact vetoes and mandatory medical forms. While we mothers at SMAAC have reservations where all the open records bills are concerned that attempt to compel medical information forms, we found the NOW statement and reply to backers of the bill interesting. As Alice said, "Curiouser and curiouser."

The women of NOW are just as emotionally and, probably, financially invested in keeping adoption a going concern and the lowly b****mother in her place as any other group that favors adoption and closed records. Many of these women have pursued the dream of "having it all" and delayed starting a family until it was too late to produce many viable ova...one of the leading causes of infertility in the US. Thus, many have adopted and they want their "as if born to" fantasy as much as any other adopter. Many of them are attorneys. It is so good of them, they who endeavor to present women as strong and capable, to feel that we weak and vulnerable mothers need protection. Which side of the mushroom do I bite on that one?

If the OBC were opened to all adopted people and mothers, there looms, for the adopters, the specter of reunion. If the idea that SMAAC has espoused, repeal of the amended birth certificate, were enacted, then the fantasy of as if born to is crushed from the start. So the lobbyists and protesters (like the MI Bar Association, the NCFA, NOW) start bombarding the committee the minute the bill gets to them. And all of their protests and all of their conditions and requirements seem to have one (admitted) rallying cry...the assumed-to-be "guaranteed privacy" of the (natural)mother. YEAH, RIGHT!

They completely ignore the fact that we were never promised any confidentiality past our stays in maternity homes and situations prior to coerced surrender. They just want to keep the fantasy going so as not to kill the lucrative market and are not above placing mothers' heads on the chopping block, yet again, to get what they want. And neither adopted person nor mother is, obviously, considered capable of handling their own information and relationship.

My good friend, "Mandy Lifeboats," stated it well when she said, "Bottom-line. ..medical history aside, adoption agency records aside...the Adoption Industry does not want to allow anything that may compromise their business of adoption. They are fearful of the paying adopters deciding not to adopt at all, if the adopter cannot pretend forever, that the child they may want to purchase will not be 'as if born to'. If one has been reading at the blog I gave the link to the other day...which included comments from adopters not wanting to fill out the 2010 Census truthfully about the adopted children in their households, one can see that adopters are still fighting tooth and nail to uphold in their adopter heads....'as if born to'" Hey Mandy! I lost the link...send it to me. I'll plug it in.

Here is an excerpt from the MI NOW response letter to the bill backers that shows how the NCFA works.
"There is additional information on this issue at National Council for Adoption. Here is a quote from one article; "Unfortunately, the loudest voices legislatures and the public generally hear regarding this issue belong to a small minority of adopted persons who insist upon an absolute right to identify and even to contact their birthparents, without birthparents’ consent. A small but nationally well-organized group of activists seeks to eliminate confidentiality in adoption, or “secrecy and shame,” as they attempt to caricature it. This vocal minority has little to lose simply by persevering year after year in their efforts to eliminate confidentiality in adoption. That is not the case for birthparents who desire their privacy, however. By standing up for their rights, they lose them in the process." Consent or Coercion? How Mandatory Open Records Harm Adoption , Thomas C. Atwood (adopter)"

Atwood has also been heard to remark that the adopters, who understood what we were subjected to when forced to surrender, couldn't help the b****mothers because they would never have been able to become "parents" if they had.

Our adult children, the adopted people who are seeking the right to their original birth certificates are also, in many cases, feeling compelled to protect their adopters. So, despite what is said, if you keep moving around the Mad Hatter's table at the tea party, you can only come to the conclusion that no one is protecting natural mothers or adopted people. That is why we have to do it ourselves. If we want to avoid legal battles and unfair, one-sided regulations we have to stand up and say, Not No, But Hell No. Adopted people who are knowledgable, want what they have yet to get...a clean bill.

Whenever I read about all of this, I can come to only one conclusion. Someone has been down the rabbit hole too long.